Compare Dyson Ball Animal 2 Upright Vacuum Cleaner vs Dyson Ball Animal 3 Extra Upright Vacuum

Surface-safety evidence was positive where mentioned, especially the ability to stop the brush bar on hard floors or delicate rugs.

The pet grooming attachment raises a surface-safety concern because a reviewer found the bristles stiff and would avoid using it on a pet.

Stair cleaning was generally strong because of long hose and wand reach, though one review cited moving the heavy unit as cumbersome.

Stair cleaning is a weakness in one review because the upright body and weight make stair use less ideal.

Stuck resistance evidence was negative, focused on area rugs and mats that strong suction could grab or lift.

Stuck resistance is favorable on thick carpet because the Ball Animal 3 glides where the earlier fixed-height model bogged down.

Upright-stand stability and storage were weak spots, with multiple reviewers describing bulk or difficulty getting the vacuum to stay upright.

Its slim, short upright profile is praised for making the vacuum easy to tuck into a corner.

Assembly evidence was positive, with reviewers describing a simple setup and parts that clicked together easily.

Assembly is mixed: one comparison says the Dyson needs quite a bit of assembly, and another found setup slightly tricky.

Small-space suitability was poor because the large ball and bulky body made tight spaces and storage harder.

For a full-size upright, one review finds the machine relatively compact and suitable for tucking into smaller spaces.

Low-profile cleaning was a repeated weakness because the ball and bulk limited reach under furniture and tight areas.

The low-profile aspect is modest but positive, with one reviewer noting a slim, short profile and limited under-bed reach.

Clogging evidence was limited but negative, with reviewers noting occasional dog-hair bin sticking and a narrow tube that could clog on larger items.

Clog prevention is a strength in pet-heavy use, with reviewers highlighting anti-clog design and debris containment in the bin.

Edge and baseboard cleaning was praised in test evidence, including near-edge debris collection and edge-to-edge cleaner-head design.

Edge and baseboard cleaning is mixed: one test found the Dyson missed rice near the center, while another called edge cleaning good but not best.

High-pile carpet was the clearest cleaning limitation, especially with cereal, rugs, shag, or strong suction pulling the head down.

High-pile and plush carpet evidence is positive, with reviewers praising thick-carpet deep cleaning and plush-carpet effectiveness.

Cyclone performance was praised as central to the vacuum’s suction and constant cleaning power.

Cyclone performance is mixed: one review praises Radial Root Cyclone airflow, while another says the newer cyclone system dirties filters faster.

Hair-wrap evidence was mixed: pet-hair tools resisted tangling, but one lab measured substantial long-hair wrap on the brush roll.

Hair-wrap resistance is one of the clearest strengths, with multiple reviewers reporting virtually no tangles, clean vanes, and self-clearing brush behavior.

Crevice and groove pickup was split: one test praised deep crevice pickup, while hard-floor gap and larger-debris tests exposed limitations.

Crevice pickup is excellent in comparative testing, where the Dyson edges out the Shark Stratos in deep crevice sand pickup.

Noise opinions varied sharply, from quiet and acceptable in some reviews to loud or noisy in others.

Noise is a recurring drawback, with reviewers noting it is louder than some competitors and describing it as a very loud machine.

Floorhead design was a tradeoff: reviewers liked the wide, self-adjusting head, but some found it poor with larger debris.

The cleaner head is repeatedly praised as a standout feature, with efficient design, a strong seal, and a fantastic updated head.

Floorhead sealing was mixed-positive, with suction-loss control praised but active-baseplate behavior linked to large-debris problems.

The floorhead seal is praised in comparative testing for forming a tight seal against the floor.

Ease of use was generally positive, especially for routine movement and cleaning tasks, though weight-related handling complaints appear under other attributes.

Ease of use is mixed: one reviewer liked how the machine follows the hose, while another said several operations take getting used to.

Value was the main split: some reviewers said the power justified the price, while others called it too expensive or best only on sale.

Value is mixed to negative: reviewers praise performance, but one calls it pricey and another doubts paying extra for bundled tools.

Under-furniture pickup was mixed-to-negative; wand/tools helped some users, but the bulky ball limited precision and low-clearance reach.

Under-furniture pickup is limited but possible, with one review noting it can reach under the bed a little.

Medium or thicker-carpet suitability was supported by reviewers who described the wider brush bar and flooring range as appropriate for thicker or medium pile.

Medium-pile carpet pickup scores very strongly in testing, including a perfect carpet deep-clean score and top sand pickup results.

Hard-floor large-debris intake was mixed, ranging from strong cereal pickup to complaints that the head pushed larger debris.

Large debris intake is generally strong, but not perfect: some reviews praise larger debris pickup while others note popcorn or similar debris can spit forward.

Tool changes were generally described as easy, with attachments clicking on, staying secure, or being simple to use.

Tool changes are mixed: one reviewer praised the easy teardown and quick-release wand, while another found getting the hose out awkward.

Heavy-duty suitability was mixed: reviewers admired its power for busy homes, but some found it impractical for varied carpets or prolonged whole-house use.

Reviewers frame it as a heavy-duty machine, citing powerful air speed, lift, and a Terminator-like readiness for demanding pet messes.

Overall opinion was mixed-to-positive: many reviewers loved the cleaning power, but some rejected it over price, weight, or handling.

Overall sentiment is very positive across reviews, with repeated top-choice language, high ratings, and strong owner satisfaction.

Comparative performance was strong overall, but not unanimous: some reviews ranked it among the best, while others found cheaper models performed better.

Comparative evidence is favorable: reviewers say it impressed against other uprights, outshined competition on carpet, and felt like a worthy successor.

Hard-floor fine-dust pickup was strong in some tests but weaker in floor cracks and gaps.

Hard-floor fine dust pickup is praised in testing, with the reviewer saying it handles the finest dust particles well.

Innovation evidence centered on Dyson’s ball and self-adjusting systems, which reviewers called distinctive or inventive, but sometimes with practical tradeoffs.

The new cleaner head and adjustable gates are seen as meaningful innovations versus previous Dyson uprights.

Area-rug results were mixed: one owner cleaned small rugs quickly with tools, while testers found strong suction could make rugs unworkable or sticky.

Area rug handling is mixed: one review says it glides on a thick rug, while others warn it may be too strong or hard to move on carpet.

Weight was one of the most repeated drawbacks, with reviewers calling it heavy or difficult to lug, despite some tool-based workarounds.

Weight is a consistent downside: reviewers describe it as the heaviest in a comparison, not lightweight, and tiring to lift.

Pet-ready performance was a strong point, with pet hair and upholstery hair pickup repeatedly praised, though one turbine-tool comment was critical.

Pet-related evidence is highly positive: reviewers praise fur pickup, pet-focused attachments, anti-tangle behavior, and usefulness in shedding-heavy homes.

Maneuverability was polarizing: the ball design helped turning, but weight and suction made some users work harder.

Maneuverability is mostly praised for the ball steering and tight turns, though one review says the ball-style steering takes some getting used to.

Hose and wand reach were praised for stairs and above-floor cleaning, though one owner disliked a stiff non-bending section.

The hose and wand range is praised for above-floor reach and easier high/low cleaning.

Ongoing ownership costs were favorable because the vacuum is bagless and uses washable or reusable filters.

Ownership costs are viewed favorably because washable filters and reusable filtration reduce replacement needs.

Reviewers consistently liked the included tools and attachments, especially when they made hair, upholstery, and detailed cleaning easier.

Attachments are generally well regarded, especially the pet grooming, turbine, crevice, stair, and upholstery tools, though the Extra package value is debated elsewhere.

Suction was the strongest consensus attribute, repeatedly praised as exceptional, powerful, or among the strongest tested.

Reviewers consistently describe suction and airflow as a major strength, with lab results and user tests showing strong lift, deep cleaning, and upholstery power.

Above-floor and upholstery cleaning was a strength because the wand, hose, and attachments were useful on sofas, stairs, furniture, and high areas.

Above-floor and upholstery pickup is strong, with reviewers praising turbine tools, couch and car-seat cleaning, and no suction loss with attachments.

The bagless bin was praised for large capacity and reduced interruptions, though most comments focused on capacity and disposal rather than aesthetics.

The bin is viewed positively in the hands-on review, mainly because of its large capacity.

Versatility was strong for tool-based cleaning, although one professional review noted it was less versatile than some uprights.

Reviewers see it as versatile across mess sizes, surfaces, modes, and whole-apartment cleaning, especially with carpets, hard floors, and attachments.

Hair pickup on carpets and pet hair tests was a major strength across lab and owner reviews.

Hair pickup on carpets is very strong, with lab and review evidence showing most hair picked up and long/pet hair efficiently removed.

Controls were viewed favorably when mentioned, especially suction settings and brush controls that let users adjust spinning or suction behavior.

Reviewers like the adjustable gates and suction controls because they improve control across surfaces and debris types.

Cord reach was consistently positive where mentioned, with reviewers appreciating the long cord or cable for larger cleaning areas.

Cord length is consistently praised, especially the 35-foot cord and long total cleaning range.

Filtration and containment were strong overall thanks to HEPA or washable filtration, though one lab noted a partly weakened seal on an older unit.

Filtration and dust containment receive strong marks, with reviewers praising HEPA-level containment, allergen capture, and cleaner air while vacuuming.

Reviewers who commented on looks described the Dyson as cool, futuristic, or one-of-a-kind, with no major finish complaints in the evidence.

A WIRED review explicitly praises the vacuum’s styling while also noting broad floor-surface performance.

Build quality evidence was mixed-positive: some reviewers called the plastics robust and durable, while one disliked a cheap-feeling hose handle.

Build quality evidence is positive for the wand, which a reviewer describes as high-quality plastic that does not tend to snap.

Emptying and mess control were consistently praised, with several reviewers saying the bin empties easily and keeps hands away from debris.

Emptying and mess control are viewed positively, with reviewers calling the bin hygienic, easy to empty, and clean to handle.

Maintenance was considered straightforward, especially because filters can be washed and routine cleaning tasks are easy to access.

Maintenance is viewed positively overall, with a reviewer explicitly calling it very easy.

The self-adjusting head earned praise for adapting across floors, but multiple tests found that the same tight seal could hinder large debris or rugs.

One reviewer liked that the rollers stop in the upright position, framing it as a useful safety behavior around children.

Low-pile and general carpet pickup drew strong praise, with several reviewers reporting excellent or near-record cleaning results.

Handheld conversion was a weakness because a reviewer noted it cannot become a lightweight handheld unit like some alternatives.

Cord management is praised in the unboxing review because the hook lets the user remove the whole cable in one go.

The dual-motor design is evaluated positively because the brush motor is described as not stealing power from the main motor.

Hair-removal-channel evidence is mixed to negative: reviewers found balls trapped in the vanes and hair caught on comb teeth despite overall anti-tangle strengths.

Hard-floor hair pickup is praised in Forbes’ evidence that suction lifts hair from both carpets and hard floors.

The lack of LEDs on the floorhead was a clear drawback in the only opinionated evidence for this attribute.

Kid-friendliness evidence was positive, with one household reporting children enjoyed using the tools and another praising upright roller safety.

Onboard tool storage was praised when mentioned, especially the integrated storage for upright accessories.

Durability and longevity evidence was positive, with reviewers citing long-term use, flagship status, or confidence from warranty/build quality.

Support and reliability evidence was positive, driven by the five-year warranty and reviewer confidence in coverage.